Which filter

**pentagor** · 01-03-2008, 04:51 AM

Hi guys!

One question: Is there any filter (UV, Pol), which will remove this fogy foreground there on this photo? I know I can add contrast to it, but then the ground will be too dark. Is there any way to get more contrast photo with filter?
EXIF:
Tamron AF 70-300 @ 300m, f/19, 1/250 sec

OniFactor · 01-03-2008, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by pentagor

Hi guys!

One question: Is there any filter (UV, Pol), which will remove this fogy foreground there on this photo?

UV may help.. i'd suggest shooting it in IR, instead.. give it a different feel. :-)

**pentagor** · 01-04-2008, 02:43 AM

Thnx for your opinion....

simonkit · 01-04-2008, 03:49 AM

Sometimes a polariser can help, must admit though it doesn't work all that often.

In photoshop there are a couple of "tricks" worth trying:

1. Select a brush tool
2. make size 400
3. set opacity 8%
4. change MODE to COLOUR BURN
5. In colour palette/swatch choose a light/neutral brown
6. wipe over image with brush tool until desired effect achieved

Also - a bit more brutal....

In USM:

AMOUNT = 50 , RAD = 100, THR = 0

simon

J.Scott · 01-04-2008, 04:25 AM

I don't think any filter will bring this back to life. Having a Cir. Pol. filter in your kit is a good thing - it can't hurt to try a shot with and one without the filter. Most other filtering effects can be done in PS. In its current state it is really washed out. I played with it a bit in PS (with my limited skills) and I think it looks a bit more pleasing to the eye. Maybe this is not the effect you are trying to achieve. The mountains and clouds look sharper, but the foreground and upper sky looks noisy. I see you used ISO 200 but it looks very noisy - I am not sure why. Also, your sensor is littered with dust particles - a good cleaning is in order.

**pentagor** · 01-04-2008, 04:41 AM

Originally posted by J.Scott

I don't think any filter will bring this back to life. Having a Cir. Pol. filter in your kit is a good thing - it can't hurt to try a shot with and one without the filter. Most other filtering effects can be done in PS. In its current state it is really washed out. I played with it a bit in PS (with my limited skills) and I think it looks a bit more pleasing to the eye. Maybe this is not the effect you are trying to achieve. The mountains and clouds look sharper, but the foreground and upper sky looks noisy. I see you used ISO 200 but it looks very noisy - I am not sure why. Also, your sensor is littered with dust particles - a good cleaning is in order.

Thanks! I also done that in PS, but the effect realy isnt what I was looking for.
And yes, I know, the dust....

(the big dust i allready removed....)

Kaimarx · 01-04-2008, 06:31 AM

Either a polarizer or a graduated nd filter will work. Best bet is a good multicoated UV but they can be expensive (Hoya, Sigma to name a few). Heliopan also make multicoated anti haze filters (UV), same story... expensive but it pays to get the best you can afford.

spyglass · 01-04-2008, 11:27 AM

Good Morning Pentagor,

If I was faced with the same shot I would use a Cokin graduated filter (you could try the light blue, or a neutral density). The bonus of using the square graduated Cokin filter is that it lets you expose for the foreground to get the detail you want while not burning all the detail out of the sky. The square filter lets you slide it up or down to establish exactly where you wish the to influence. You could also try adding a polarizer to help create additional detail to the cloud. This should give you the best capture.
Then if you still felt that you wanted to work it further you could do a little Post Editing in PS. The photo could easily be dived into 4 bands (foreground, aft ground, mountain, sky) save each as a layer and adjust individually. The foreground would benefit from a slight warming PS photofilter to create a contrast to the cold mountain.

Spyglass

Not Registered · 01-04-2008, 01:17 PM

Add my vote to the polarizer and think that a good multicoated-UV can also help.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-04-2008, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by Gruoso

Add my vote to the polarizer and think that a good multicoated-UV can also help.

But never both at once. Too many reflections, too much increase in the odds of the filter mount vignetting the image - the wide, wide lenses can see the filter. On some, only super thin filters will not vignette.

Not Registered · 01-04-2008, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

But never both at once. Too many reflections, too much increase in the odds of the filter mount vignetting the image - the wide, wide lenses can see the filter. On some, only super thin filters will not vignette.

True, I was referring to have either one or the other but after reading my post looked like I were suggesting both together. Thank you for the correction.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-04-2008, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by Gruoso

True, I was referring to have either one or the other but after reading my post looked like I were suggesting both together. Thank you for the correction.

I meant it only as an amplification for the new users. I should also amend my post to indicate that with some lenses, the only solution to the vignetting problem is to use oversized filters and a very shallow step up ring.

spyglass · 01-04-2008, 06:45 PM

I agree you can get some vignetting if you stack too many filters (creating the dark tube effect) and have your lens zoomed out to its minimum, widest angle, offering. Simply zoom in until you see that vignetting is not a problem. Pentragor was using a 70-300mm zoom lens, appears to be on an opposite mountain or hill, and would have ample working room in his zoom range. The shot may benefit from some compositional cropping at the capture stage (development on the right is cut off and create a cut up look). It is an excellent point that Canadian Rockies brings up about vignetting as often the photographer is so focussed in the center area of his composition that he or she does not see the effects of vignetting when they are faint. As for reflections I have never had a problem from stacking a few filters (just use a hood, be aware of any unwanted light entering the lens region). I have wondered where all the light went - ha ha

Kentax · 01-04-2008, 06:55 PM

so stacking filters, say an uv and a polarizing filter will not degrade the IQ?

spyglass · 01-04-2008, 10:53 PM

Anything you place between your subject and the sensor/film will affect the image you ultimately receive. All glass has impurities, nothing is made perfect, flat, 100% aligned, all glass will reflect and distort light to some degree, etc. Luckily for us humans the results that we seek with the use of filters can far outway the harm they could ever do (but it is a good practice to buy decent filters - yes all those no name filters on Ebay from China, terrible idea).

01-03-2008, 04:51 AM	#1
pentagor Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Posts: 495	Which filter Hi guys! One question: Is there any filter (UV, Pol), which will remove this fogy foreground there on this photo? I know I can add contrast to it, but then the ground will be too dark. Is there any way to get more contrast photo with filter? EXIF: Tamron AF 70-300 @ 300m, f/19, 1/250 sec

01-04-2008, 04:25 AM	#5
J.Scott Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,675	I don't think any filter will bring this back to life. Having a Cir. Pol. filter in your kit is a good thing - it can't hurt to try a shot with and one without the filter. Most other filtering effects can be done in PS. In its current state it is really washed out. I played with it a bit in PS (with my limited skills) and I think it looks a bit more pleasing to the eye. Maybe this is not the effect you are trying to achieve. The mountains and clouds look sharper, but the foreground and upper sky looks noisy. I see you used ISO 200 but it looks very noisy - I am not sure why. Also, your sensor is littered with dust particles - a good cleaning is in order. Last edited by J.Scott; 03-30-2009 at 03:28 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax and Albinar 2x TCs, 2 Cokin A filter sets, 49mm Filter and Macro tubes	pxpaulx	Sold Items	15	02-11-2010 09:09 PM
UV filter and polarized filter	mba1971	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	11-09-2009 04:23 PM
Infrared Filter help? Bad filter and technique	Peter Zack	Photographic Technique	13	10-16-2007 06:52 AM

01-03-2008, 12:11 PM	#2
OniFactor Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Binghamton, NY, USA Posts: 643	Originally posted by pentagor Hi guys! One question: Is there any filter (UV, Pol), which will remove this fogy foreground there on this photo? UV may help.. i'd suggest shooting it in IR, instead.. give it a different feel. :-)

01-04-2008, 02:43 AM	#3
pentagor Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Posts: 495 Original Poster	Thnx for your opinion....

01-04-2008, 03:49 AM	#4
simonkit Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: North Wales, UK Posts: 645	Sometimes a polariser can help, must admit though it doesn't work all that often. In photoshop there are a couple of "tricks" worth trying: 1. Select a brush tool 2. make size 400 3. set opacity 8% 4. change MODE to COLOUR BURN 5. In colour palette/swatch choose a light/neutral brown 6. wipe over image with brush tool until desired effect achieved Also - a bit more brutal.... In USM: AMOUNT = 50 , RAD = 100, THR = 0 simon

01-04-2008, 04:41 AM	#6
pentagor Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Posts: 495 Original Poster	Originally posted by J.Scott I don't think any filter will bring this back to life. Having a Cir. Pol. filter in your kit is a good thing - it can't hurt to try a shot with and one without the filter. Most other filtering effects can be done in PS. In its current state it is really washed out. I played with it a bit in PS (with my limited skills) and I think it looks a bit more pleasing to the eye. Maybe this is not the effect you are trying to achieve. The mountains and clouds look sharper, but the foreground and upper sky looks noisy. I see you used ISO 200 but it looks very noisy - I am not sure why. Also, your sensor is littered with dust particles - a good cleaning is in order. Thanks! I also done that in PS, but the effect realy isnt what I was looking for. And yes, I know, the dust.... (the big dust i allready removed....)

01-04-2008, 06:31 AM	#7
Kaimarx Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Auckland Photos: Gallery Posts: 452	Either a polarizer or a graduated nd filter will work. Best bet is a good multicoated UV but they can be expensive (Hoya, Sigma to name a few). Heliopan also make multicoated anti haze filters (UV), same story... expensive but it pays to get the best you can afford.

01-04-2008, 11:27 AM	#8
spyglass Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: British Columbia, Canada Posts: 747	Good Morning Pentagor, If I was faced with the same shot I would use a Cokin graduated filter (you could try the light blue, or a neutral density). The bonus of using the square graduated Cokin filter is that it lets you expose for the foreground to get the detail you want while not burning all the detail out of the sky. The square filter lets you slide it up or down to establish exactly where you wish the to influence. You could also try adding a polarizer to help create additional detail to the cloud. This should give you the best capture. Then if you still felt that you wanted to work it further you could do a little Post Editing in PS. The photo could easily be dived into 4 bands (foreground, aft ground, mountain, sky) save each as a layer and adjust individually. The foreground would benefit from a slight warming PS photofilter to create a contrast to the cold mountain. Spyglass

01-04-2008, 01:17 PM	#9
Not Registered Guest	Add my vote to the polarizer and think that a good multicoated-UV can also help.

01-04-2008, 03:22 PM	#10
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by Gruoso Add my vote to the polarizer and think that a good multicoated-UV can also help. But never both at once. Too many reflections, too much increase in the odds of the filter mount vignetting the image - the wide, wide lenses can see the filter. On some, only super thin filters will not vignette.

01-04-2008, 04:28 PM	#11
Not Registered Guest	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies But never both at once. Too many reflections, too much increase in the odds of the filter mount vignetting the image - the wide, wide lenses can see the filter. On some, only super thin filters will not vignette. True, I was referring to have either one or the other but after reading my post looked like I were suggesting both together. Thank you for the correction.

01-04-2008, 04:55 PM	#12
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by Gruoso True, I was referring to have either one or the other but after reading my post looked like I were suggesting both together. Thank you for the correction. I meant it only as an amplification for the new users. I should also amend my post to indicate that with some lenses, the only solution to the vignetting problem is to use oversized filters and a very shallow step up ring.

01-04-2008, 06:45 PM	#13
spyglass Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: British Columbia, Canada Posts: 747	I agree you can get some vignetting if you stack too many filters (creating the dark tube effect) and have your lens zoomed out to its minimum, widest angle, offering. Simply zoom in until you see that vignetting is not a problem. Pentragor was using a 70-300mm zoom lens, appears to be on an opposite mountain or hill, and would have ample working room in his zoom range. The shot may benefit from some compositional cropping at the capture stage (development on the right is cut off and create a cut up look). It is an excellent point that Canadian Rockies brings up about vignetting as often the photographer is so focussed in the center area of his composition that he or she does not see the effects of vignetting when they are faint. As for reflections I have never had a problem from stacking a few filters (just use a hood, be aware of any unwanted light entering the lens region). I have wondered where all the light went - ha ha

01-04-2008, 06:55 PM	#14
Kentax Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 98	so stacking filters, say an uv and a polarizing filter will not degrade the IQ?

01-04-2008, 10:53 PM	#15
spyglass Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: British Columbia, Canada Posts: 747	Anything you place between your subject and the sensor/film will affect the image you ultimately receive. All glass has impurities, nothing is made perfect, flat, 100% aligned, all glass will reflect and distort light to some degree, etc. Luckily for us humans the results that we seek with the use of filters can far outway the harm they could ever do (but it is a good practice to buy decent filters - yes all those no name filters on Ebay from China, terrible idea).